Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
Fri Sep 30, 2016, 02:35 PM Sep 2016

California will restrict asset seizures by police

http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article105017791.html

Gov. Jerry Brown on Thursday signed legislation limiting the civil asset forfeiture process that allows police to seize property from suspected criminals.

Senate Bill 443 will require California law enforcement agencies to obtain convictions in order to keep property taken during criminal investigations even when working jointly with federal authorities that do not share that obligation....

Brown signed the measure without comment. It was a long-in-the-works priority of state Sen. Holly Mitchell, D-Los Angeles, and civil liberties advocates, who have accused police of abusing the process to pad their budgets.

The bill, which would have originally eliminated the exception for large amounts of cash, initially failed last year under heavy lobbying from law enforcement groups, who say it is a valuable tool to undercut large criminal enterprises by cutting off their financing. A deal struck in the final weeks of session last month revived SB 443 and allowed it to sail through the Legislature with overwhelming support.
4 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
California will restrict asset seizures by police (Original Post) KamaAina Sep 2016 OP
About time winetourdriver Sep 2016 #1
That is very good news! - n/t Jim__ Sep 2016 #2
Good, but I'd say it doesn't go far enough. There shouldn't be any threshold where petronius Sep 2016 #3
agreed. nt awoke_in_2003 Sep 2016 #4

petronius

(26,602 posts)
3. Good, but I'd say it doesn't go far enough. There shouldn't be any threshold where
Fri Sep 30, 2016, 04:09 PM
Sep 2016

this is allowed: no conviction* no seizure, IMO...


* I.e., prove beyond the shadow of doubt that the property was criminally-derived.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»California»California will restrict ...